pretty done
Member
Gameplay doesn't look very fun, graphics are terrible and 30fps on PC. I never tried this back in the day but I don't think I'll be trying it in the present day either.
Did you watch the video? I can understand that you don't think it looks fun and are upset about the frame rate, but the graphics are actually pretty darn good for a 2003 game, especially in terms of the text on signs and whatnot.Gameplay doesn't look very fun, graphics are terrible and 30fps on PC. I never tried this back in the day but I don't think I'll be trying it in the present day either.
Or Halo..
Man these replies are sad as hell. Sure, it's not a ground up remaster. But it's also gonna be cheap as a result - again, the original game launched at $20. Look at PS2 games on PS4 - they go up to $15 for games run through an emulator to 1280x1024 or something, and lots of people are happy to pay $15 for Rockstar games for the 4th time. Consider that they had to reverse engineer the engine and make the online backend work with modern XBL too. Seriously, where's the perspective?
Oh no, I'm not saying I want a remake, but it seems like even Polygon is changing the title of the video from Remastered to an HD-Rerelease.
As long as there's remastered in the thread title, you can be sure people will still call it out for looking crap.
Also models are redone in a lot of remasters. Like some said, we expect better things when a game is titled as remastered versions now. If it's an HD-Rerelease, sure. That's more like a port and a different thing entirely.
how so? just because its an obscure game?
Has anyone Followed him and then tried to find the game?
Agreed, I skipped this in 2003 and I'll skip it again now. Microsoft needs to make some real games quick.Gameplay doesn't look very fun, graphics are terrible and 30fps on PC. I never tried this back in the day but I don't think I'll be trying it in the present day either.
Even as short of a distance in the past as 2004, we didn't have the standards and ease of accessibility for mass storage as we do today. A lot of companies just didn't keep a whole lot of the development assets for games, including the source code, and some of them may yet be buried somewhere in an old tape drum.
Guardian Heroes HD was a pretty great example of this happening - when Sega and Treasure were working to make the re-release, they actually found a magnetic tape cassette that contained the source code, and had to venture out to multiple studios and partners of Sega's in order to gather the parts necessary to build a machine just so they could retrieve the source code, which was then used to port the game cleanly to the Xbox 360.
In addition to simply misplacing, deleting or otherwise having some hazard befall source backups, it's also entirely possible that tape decay could have set in during the interim. Which sucks, because that stuff needs to be preserved if at all possible.
Gameplay doesn't look very fun, graphics are terrible and 30fps on PC. I never tried this back in the day but I don't think I'll be trying it in the present day either.
Grabbed by the Ghoulies (again, would anybody have /really/ missed this had it not been in the Rare collection?)
A bit rough around the edges much like the Voodoo Vince remaster that came out. Wouldn't be surprised if we get a few more Xbox ports in future.
Agreed, I skipped this in 2003 and I'll skip it again now. Microsoft needs to make some real games quick.
Agreed, I skipped this in 2003 and I'll skip it again now. Microsoft needs to make some real games quick.
If you're skipping this game for superficial graphical nitpicks you are only hurting yourself. Criminally underrated and underplayed game. If this had been on PS2 it would be God Hand level cult status by now.
If you're skipping this game for superficial graphical nitpicks you are only hurting yourself. Criminally underrated and underplayed game. If this had been on PS2 it would be God Hand level cult status by now.
Did you not read about what Code Mystics had to do to bring this to light of day...?or top spin
how so? just because its an obscure game?
Regardless of what happens I think this release will be much more successful imoIt's a shame MS didn't believe in it back then, leaving it to a failing Majesco to publish. It had little to no marketing and the bairgain price point left it to die on the shelves.
Man these replies are sad as hell. Sure, it's not a ground up remaster. But it's also gonna be cheap as a result - again, the original game launched at $20. Look at PS2 games on PS4 - they go up to $15 for games run through Sony's emulator to 1280x1024 or something, and lots of people are happy to pay that price for Rockstar games for the 4th time. Consider that for Phantom Dust MS had to reverse engineer the engine and make the online backend work with modern XBL too. Seriously, where's the perspective? Phantom Dust is being re-released for modern systems, and that's enough to be happy about.
I'm seeing more people than I think is reasonable basically insistent that it would be better if this didn't exist.
God I hope this is sarcasm.Look, most of these folks aren't biting because it's Microsoft that had a good idea and released it, and not Sony or Nintendo, and they can't get over the cognitive dissonance of Microsoft doing something great.
What is a real game?
Look, most of these folks aren't biting because it's Microsoft that had a good idea and released it, and not Sony or Nintendo, and they can't get over the cognitive dissonance of Microsoft doing something great.
Regardless of what happens I think this release will be much more successful imo
There is going to be microtransactions in every goddamn MS game from now to end times isn't there
I think the fact that it will come out in PAL, has a much bigger potential audience for to market growth and will be <= $20 gives it a very good chance at doing better and then yes we have the optional micro transactionsI hope so. It's a super fun game that deserves a second chance.
I think the fact that it will come out in PAL, has a much bigger potential audience for to market growth and will be <= $20 gives it a very good chance at doing better and then yes we have the optional micro transactions
Going by what was said in the video when price was mentioned, I'm expecting $10. Adam says people will be very happy when it comes to price at the end of the video.
I'd happily pay more than $10 though since I love the game.
Look, most of these folks aren't biting because it's Microsoft that had a good idea and released it, and not Sony or Nintendo, and they can't get over the cognitive dissonance of Microsoft doing something great.
Nah, there are many Xbox One fans as well that are quite disappointed. I was expecting it to be simply a re-release cause they indeed never said it would be a remake or remaster, but I was still hoping for a bigger rework.
All this "no source code" thing though seems to justify the graphics and the frame-rate lock. But I don't understand about coding and have no idea how much it would indeed prevent them from doing a bigger upgrade (a remaster would be good). I didn't completely bought this justification just yet...
And I think that with microtransactions they should just release it for free. If this game was $20 back then, in 2003, today it should cost considerably cheaper... but since there's not much of an upgrade (no gameplay and very little graphical improvements) from a 14 years old game, maybe they could convince more people to jump in if given it for free and monetize on the microtransaction stuff they put in.
If it is so easy to get all the cards playing the campaign, I really don't get why they're selling them separetly as well. Again something I'm not totally convinced... I heard so many times developers saying the balance of the multiplayer won't be affected by non-cosmetical microtransactions, and they're generally so wrong, that here I find a little bit difficult to believe.
I understand this is not what they teased in that E3 (and I know it was canceled), but it's quite sad that we came from the hype of a brand new Phantom Dust, made with all the improvements this gen could offer (better UI, better controls, better graphics, 60fps) to a pure re-release of a 2003 game injected by microtransactions.
I mean, he goes in to pretty deep detail about what they could and couldn't do based on their situation. For example, They could add new skills, but they'd be limited to creating them by mashing existing ones together. They can adjust value levels like how much damage a skill does. But they can't add new maps. Sounds like they couldn't even replace textures. He mentions one of the fixes they wanted to make was to have a certain item disappear after a certain time and ideally that would have had a whole animation etc to it, but the only way they could was to adjust a value on it's timer.Nah, there are many Xbox One fans as well that are quite disappointed. I was expecting it to be simply a re-release cause they indeed never said it would be a remake or remaster, but I was still hoping for a bigger rework.
All this "no source code" thing though seems to justify the graphics. But I don't understand about coding and have no idea how much it would indeed prevent them from doing a bigger rework (a remaster would be good). I didn't completely bought this justification just yet...
I mean, that would be nice, but there is a whole campaign and stuff in this. A lot of people who played this even back when it came out probably never touched the multiplayer. I know I didn't (because I didn't have XBLive yet)And I think that with microtransactions they should just release it for free. If this game was $20 back then, in 2003, today it should cost considerably cheaper... but since there's not much of an upgrade (no gameplay and very little graphical improvements) from a 14 years old game, maybe they could convince more people to jump in if given it for free and monetize on the microtransaction stuff they put in.
You get a lot of skills from campaign, but not all of them. In the original, you unlocked a skill shop after beating the game and you grinded to get more. The MTXs are an avenue for people who want to totally forgo the campaign and jump straight in to multiplayer, or for older players who want to rebuild decks they used to have straight out the gate without having to grind them back out.If it is so easy to get all the cards playing the campaign, I really don't get why they're selling them separetly as well. Again something I'm not totally convinced... I heard so many times developers saying the balance of the multiplayer won't be affected by non-cosmetical microtransactions, and they're generally so wrong, that here I find a little bit difficult to believe.
Nah, there are many Xbox One fans as well that are quite disappointed. I was expecting it to be simply a re-release cause they indeed never said it would be a remake or remaster, but I was still hoping for a bigger rework.
All this "no source code" thing though seems to justify the graphics and the frame-rate lock. But I don't understand about coding and have no idea how much it would indeed prevent them from doing a bigger upgrade (a remaster would be good). I didn't completely bought this justification just yet...
And I think that with microtransactions they should just release it for free. If this game was $20 back then, in 2003, today it should cost considerably cheaper... but since there's not much of an upgrade (no gameplay and very little graphical improvements) from a 14 years old game, maybe they could convince more people to jump in if given it for free and monetize on the microtransaction stuff they put in.
If it is so easy to get all the cards playing the campaign, I really don't get why they're selling them separetly as well. Again something I'm not totally convinced... I heard so many times developers saying the balance of the multiplayer won't be affected by non-cosmetical microtransactions, and they're generally so wrong, that here I find a little bit difficult to believe.
I understand this is not what they teased in that E3 (and I know it was canceled), but it's quite sad that we came from the hype of a brand new Phantom Dust, made with all the improvements this gen could offer (better UI, better controls, better graphics, 60fps) to a pure re-release of a 2003 game injected by microtransactions.
You get a lot of skills from campaign, but not all of them. In the original, you unlocked a skill shop after beating the game and you grinded to get more. The MTXs are an avenue for people who want to totally forgo the campaign and jump straight in to multiplayer, or for older players who want to rebuild decks they used to have straight out the gate without having to grind them back out.
Let me clear the air a bit. I'm Adam Isgreen (mods feel free to verify), the guy talking in the interview.
My bad for not correcting Nick immediately on remaster vs. re-release. We had a fire drill go off during the interview (random, yes), and that certainly disrupted the flow of the conversation, as we picked up in the middle after I could get back in the building.
My personal story on PD is that I missed it on the original Xbox. I'm pretty ashamed of that since I adore all of Futatsugi-san's games, have all of the Panzers in both Japanese and English, including Saga (SEGA GIVE IT TO CODE MYSTICS!), and I somehow missed this game.
I first played it after hearing Phil mention that he constantly gets asked about it by press / fans on Twitter. Grabbed it on 360 BC. After the first hour I thought "what is all the fuss about?". It starts slow and doesn't pick up until you get past Chapter 2 and can build arsenals (decks), which can be a good two hours into the game. Once that happens in campaign, and when you start to play multiplayer, this light goes on and you realize how deep and amazing this game is at its heart. 13 years and there's no perfect deck to the game. Stick skill and deck planning are equally as important. Teamwork is insanely rewarding. There's a skill that does anything you can possibly imagine you could do in arena-based combat.
Consider me converted. I get it now. More people need to grok this game. I'm part of the cult, and that's OK, because it's a great cult to be in.
The game is a re-release of the 2004 game with improvements that were possible to do without having final source code. I get that many just don't care about that point (should you need to?) but it is what it is and it is a huge deal to not have access to source yet try to improve things anyway. Could we have done more if we had working final source code? Yes, without a doubt, but that wasn't the case.
Let me add that Code Mystics (the development team) are absolute ninjas. This was a 2004 4:3 game. They cracked open and rewrote the renderer, fixed the culling (making the screen display 16x9 is only the first part of the issue), added LIVE support, enabled easy balance tuning, got cross-play working, re-enabled hundreds of custom shaders and VFX (DX8 to DX11 is not a fun conversion, I've learned), made UI changes, and got the framerate to a massively stable 30 FPS on any machine / platform, all while not being able to truly modify the game at its core. That is a feat. Likely you have to be in development to appreciate that, but it's not easy work.
Why isn't it 60 FPS?
The entire engine was built around the game running at 30 FPS. Everything in the code and data is either frames @ 30, assumes 30, or hard-coded to expect 30 FPS.
The frame rate averages 30 FPS now on a wide range of systems. The worst dips we've seen are to 26/27 in certain moments. This is massively improved from the original (for those that played it) which would drop into the teens constantly on destruction events.
Here's PC min-specs:
OS: Windows 10 64-bit
Processor: Intel Core2 Duo E6550 @ 2.33GHz | AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5600+
Memory: 1 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 | AMD Radeon HD 7750
DirectX: Version 11
Network: Broadband Internet connection
It's an XPA title, so cross-play and cross-saves are supported.
Why original assets?
Because we didn't have source is the major reason, and also because for a 2004 game, it holds up well in comparison to other games from that time. That's subjective of course, but we're trying to capture and preserve what PD was, not re-create it. It was funky, certainly, and that's part of its DNA.
Why wasn't a date / price announced?
We're re-releasing PD because we love its unique gameplay and style. Everyone here at MS wants PD to get a chance to be played, so sometimes dates, price, and how to get it broad exposure is debated a lot. Gold? Not? Free? Not? Other programs? It goes back and forth, and many different groups are in that discussion. The short of it is that we want everyone to be able to play PD, so you can expect it'll be priced accordingly.
OMG there's micro-transactions?!
Yes, to accelerate multiplayer deck building. It is completely optional. The campaign gets you a lot of skills and credits to use just by playing through it. You also earn skills and credits just by playing MP as well. PD already has a skill shop, credits, random "junk" packs, rare skills, and everything you'd seen in games today -- and it did all that in 2004.
There's also free skills and a deck case you get to start MP off with, so that if you don't want to play the campaign, you don't have to.
Graphics are dated, meme.jpg, etc.
Yep! It's a game from 2004. We preserved its look, but really you shouldn't be hung up on looks here because this is a player's game, not a looker's game. Design-wise and mechanically, you will not find another game that plays like it, even today (closest in feeling is MOBAs, actually).
Sometimes (well, OK, often) we make games to make money, but this re-release isn't focused on that. It's about recognizing something unique and novel, and allowing more people to discover it. PD's play - especially multiplayer - is completely unique and (IMO) very, very fun. It never got a chance to prove that on its original (limited) release, so now more people get to discover it, which is all we want out of it.
So I'll simply close by saying play first, then judge. Feel free to tweet me your thoughts once it's out (@Ishmae1) and I'll be happy to discuss it with you.
Was needed too much grind to get the better cards? I think if grindind is still a bit of a pain, even though you can acquire all cards simply by playing, the microtransactions could hurt the balance. Some people would jump in immediatly with a good deck while others would have to slowly build their way up there.
Anyway... as long as the SP is also strong I think I'm particularly okay with it and may give it a chance, as long as they price it right.
It's absolutely crazy how people admit they don't know much about how a game is developed but still have mistrust or suspicions behind what a developer says.
Again, I never got a chance to play multiplayer back in the day so I can't comment on how hard the grind is. I think being worried about P2W is valid but, from what I hear, the game is very balanced and there is no perfect deck. There might be some core skills that everyone should have, but for all we know they could be included in that free DLC pack or through the campaign. Wish I could speak more to it, but again, I never got a chance to play multiplayer so someone else would be able to answer that better.